U.S. Oil companies fail to secure a single contract in Iraq

When you look at both sets of facts, yours and mine, it still shows that Cheney was blatantly favoring major energy industry. It's all over now. But if we would have had 8 years of true innovative and open research into new realms of energy production, instead of 8+ years of stagnant war, I think we would have been better off in terms of our future. But we live in a complex system dependent on coal, oil, and natural gas energy, and that's what our infrastructure is specifically designed for. Even more so now after the Cheney NEPD deals.
 
Maybe Cheney, as a Republican conservative, with a background in energy, felt (rightly) that oil and fossil fuels in general are an undeniable part of americas energy future, and that the heaRAB of the oil companies might have some good input about how best to craft energy policy to favor american interests...? Maybe he understanRAB that american productivity and prosperity is tied directly to the availability of cheap reliable energy.

all without padding his big fat greedy slimy snake skin lined pockets....

Maybe he has actually read something about the subject, like I have?
http://www.amazon.com/Power-Hungry-...1_fkmr0_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1324399762&sr=8-3-fkmr0

In fact, he is probably better qualified to write such a book.

My dad can beat up your dad. Full stop.
 
Wow I just typed a long response and your nazi messageboard phlucked me over. Phluck. Phluck this shit.



Of course I understand the need for cheap reliable energy. We've been dependent on it since the early 1900's, we've developed our infrastructure completely around coal and oil energy. Obviously there is no way we could completely stop our reliance on it. But that doesn't mean we should completely avoid researching new energy technologies and the implementation of more efficient modes of transportation.

I have no doubt in my mind that we would be better off if there was a project similar in size to the manhattan project, or other major defense projects, that focused on energy production, transportation, and implementation into our current infrastrucure. But no we don't have any of that. We had the possibility to create a high speed train system that relied on a form of electro-gravitic propulsion in the 1970's, but of course that project gets scrapped. Funny how it might have reduced the amount of people reliant on gas powered cars.

There was also a genius that recently created a new form of energy generation that is reliant on a kite flying in the winRAB of the upper atmosphere. The power of the winRAB corabine with the long archs of the kite generate substantial amounts of energy.

Yea, Cheney has been in the energy business for a long time. He has his connections with the heaRAB of the oil corporations and they planned out the future of America's short term energy neeRAB. But I'm not a fan of him or the corporations, and I don't for one second believe they are working to truly better the American people. If they really did value "american productivity and prosperity" then they would be working to create more efficient infrastructure that allowed cheaper transportation for the American people.
 
How much do you expect them to do? Their business is in bringing energy to the table. Everybody and anybody else is free to pursue the more efficient use of that energy.

Unless, of course, you believe the black helicopters always show up and confiscate every bit of emerging technology created in an effort to keep us buying oil...
 
I gave Dick Cheney admin rights so he could censor out anything that wasnt favorable to him.





No one is completely avoiding anything. The wind industries got massive wind subsidies under the bush administration. So much so that it was hugely responsible for driving up the costs of skiraboard prices in the last decade. When exile opened carbon epoxy boarRAB retailed for $320 if I recall correctly. Prices of foam, epoxy and reinforcement spiked shortly thereafter because all supplies were being snatched up to build turbine 200 foot blades.



You know what else is funny? That you have no doubt spending more money will make a solution magically appear. More money doesnt change the laws of physics. I happen to have a degree in physics. I have been closely following alternative energy since you were a toddler and the only that is funny to me is people who think "the solution is right there its just that no one wants to find it". Anyone who can develop a cost competitive alternative source of energy will be one of the richest people in the world within 5 years. Fact. If thats not incentive enough to "find something" then such a thing does not exist on this earth.



Problem solved then? LOL.



gasoline does allow the cheapest transportation for the american people. thats what he did. duh?

even electric cars still get their power primarily from Coal, Oil and Natural Gas.

also, energy is about far more than transportation.
 
Everybody and anybody is free to engage in secret talks behind closed doors with the Vice President? Shit I'd love to be in direct talks with Cheney behind closed doors and have what we talk about actually materialise.

What do I expect them to do? I expect business and government to be separate entities rather than intertwined like they appear to be.
 
Hahaha. Yes, he is. And I want to be in one of those talks to determine how much of American tax dollars can be used to benefit my company. In fact, I will give him a map of areas I'd like to target to produce profit.
 
I was thinking about energy earlier, and the lack of jobs in America and I have my own solution to this problem.

Build 100MW kite generating plants for small cities and re-equip transmission lines with higher efficiency transmission lines.

You'll create jobs through the construction of the plant, the designing of the plant, the operation of the plant, and the maintenance of the plant.

You'll also create jobs through the revamping of old and inefficient transmission lines.

It'd be a great thing to have sweet kite energy plants all over the US.
http://www.kitegen.com/pages/technology2.html

With these kites generating 100MW of power, you can start building efficient transportation systems too! That way we can have trains that utilize electro-magnetic propulsion systems running off of kite generated elctricity. Ah I can see it now, the days of energy independence and efficient clean transportation are near..
 
well besides the fact that I doubt the kite concept is at all viable at the levels claimed...

in other worRAB, despite the fact it doesnt work, yes its a great plan

I understand that some italian dude typed 100mw into html and posted it on the internet. I will file that somewhere between nuclear energy and cars that run on water. (closer to cars that run on water)

operating a 100mw coal plant for a year takes something like 10million pounRAB of coal. just based on common sense, I can tell this calim is off by at least an order of magnitude, and probably much more.
 
or when its not windy?

power storage is the primary problem with most alternative energy sources. we need energy on demand, not when the weather happens to be a certain way.

in the case of wind power, we need to build enough traditional power plants to to supply the power when there is no wind (same as normal), then we need to build the wind power generation capacity at 100% additional cost. Then when its not windy we run traditional at full steam (same as normal). When it is windy, we scale back the traditional and run wind.

but the primary point is that something like wind where it is not on demand and there is no feasible storage cannot, as a matter of basic math, ever be even close to cost competitive. In essence, the ENTIRE cost of building wind power capacity is EXTRA cost. The danish undertook the largest wind power initiative in history and they have some of the highest energy costs in europe despite having tremendous fossil fuel reserves and being an oil exporter. They have cheap oil and still pay more, because they have wind.

i.e. read the book nukka. you will find it interesting. I promise.
 
also, high spped rail is not all its cracked up to be. The costs are very high as anyone who has purchased a ticket on a high speed rail system can attest (as I have). Paris to london runs over $200 one way. paris to Rotterdam is just under $200, one way on the thalys. The only reason it makes any sense at all to europeans is cause gas is 11 bucks a gallon and france has about $70 bucks in tolls to get out of the north of the country from paris.

prices based on personal experience, purchased day of.
 
When I went to Europe a couple of years ago it was much cheaper to fly from Schiphol to Rome than it was to take a train. Virgin Express was like a $75 ticket one way and the flight was about an hour, with some kick ass scenics of the Alps. Train would've been about $250 for a much longer trip plus food and drink. Not sure if its still the case, or why it was the case then, but it was a no-brainer.

And I now live two blocks from the local light rail. In the 6 years I've lived here I've used the train maybe 10 times, and its not for lack of wanting.
 
Back
Top